IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i2d10.1007_s10668-022-02865-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discovering the sustainable challenges of biomass energy: a case study of Tehran metropolitan

Author

Listed:
  • Guang-Jun Jiang

    (Inner Mongolia University of Technology
    Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Advanced Manufacturing Technology)

  • Cheng-Geng Huang

    (Sun Yat-Sen University)

  • Arman Nedjati

    (Quchan University of Technology)

  • Mohammad Yazdi

    (Memorial University of Newfoundland)

Abstract

The extensive oil and gas industrial sectors have caused several environmental problems in Iran. This motivated the governments to consider the potential capacity developing renewable energies such as biomass energy as an excellent strategic plan for sustainable sources. However, biomass energy is at the early stage because of multi-dimensional barriers (e.g., social, technical, and policy). Thus, there is a need to assess and evaluate the existing challenges and provide a strategic plan to assist decision-makers, for the country's sustainable biomass energy development. A novel approach is developed in the current study by extending the Interval-valued Spherical fuzzy best–worst method (IVSFS-BWM) and decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (IVSFS-DEMATEL). n the seven steps methodology, IVSFS-BWM is utilized to derive the optimum importance weights of contributing factors in sustainable challenges of biomass energy. Then, IVSFS-DEMATEL is employed to find causality and interrelationships between the contributing factors. 39 numbers of challenges as influential parameters are taken into account to study the challenges of biomass energy. A comparison with familiar decision-making competitors’ tools has been conducted to show the advantages and robustness of the proposed methodology. The results indicated that the proposed method can adequately deal with subjective uncertainties from decision-making opinions, and the challenge of the contributing factors in biofuel energy as “fear of public health and safety hazards” needs necessary attention to the contributing factors in the system such as “lack of professional training institute,” “lack of infrastructural requirements,” and “lack of investors,” considering the resilience aspects. Moreover, the sensitivity analysis is conducted and by checking all contributing factors, concluded that the system is not fully sensitive to the variation, as it is less partially dependent and reflects the conformity of obtained results as accurately as possible. The outcomes assist decision-makers in providing an effective strategic plan by eliminating the multi-dimensional barriers in sustainable biomass energy development.

Suggested Citation

  • Guang-Jun Jiang & Cheng-Geng Huang & Arman Nedjati & Mohammad Yazdi, 2024. "Discovering the sustainable challenges of biomass energy: a case study of Tehran metropolitan," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 3957-3992, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02865-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02865-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-022-02865-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-022-02865-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammad Yazdi & Farzaneh Nikfar & Mahnaz Nasrabadi, 2017. "Failure probability analysis by employing fuzzy fault tree analysis," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 8(2), pages 1177-1193, November.
    2. Gunjan Yadav & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Sunil Luthra & Suresh Jakhar, 2018. "Hybrid BWM-ELECTRE-based decision framework for effective offshore outsourcing adoption: a case study," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(18), pages 6259-6278, September.
    3. Thornley, Patricia, 2006. "Increasing biomass based power generation in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2087-2099, October.
    4. Samadi, Seyed Hashem & Ghobadian, Barat & Nosrati, Mohsen, 2020. "Prediction and estimation of biomass energy from agricultural residues using air gasification technology in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1077-1091.
    5. Narwane, Vaibhav S. & Yadav, Vinay Surendra & Raut, Rakesh D. & Narkhede, Balkrishna E. & Gardas, Bhaskar B., 2021. "Sustainable development challenges of the biofuel industry in India based on integrated MCDM approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 298-309.
    6. Rezaei, Mahdi & Ghobadian, Barat & Samadi, Seyed Hashem & Karimi, Samira, 2018. "Electric power generation from municipal solid waste: A techno-economical assessment under different scenarios in Iran," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 46-56.
    7. Yeh, Tsu-Ming & Huang, Yu-Lang, 2014. "Factors in determining wind farm location: Integrating GQM, fuzzy DEMATEL, and ANP," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 159-169.
    8. Avinash, A. & Sasikumar, P. & Murugesan, A., 2018. "Understanding the interaction among the barriers of biodiesel production from waste cooking oil in India- an interpretive structural modeling approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 678-684.
    9. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    10. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    11. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    12. Andrea Saltelli, 2002. "Sensitivity Analysis for Importance Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 579-590, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    3. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    4. Amin Vafadarnikjoo & Madjid Tavana & Tiago Botelho & Konstantinos Chalvatzis, 2020. "A neutrosophic enhanced best–worst method for considering decision-makers’ confidence in the best and worst criteria," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 289(2), pages 391-418, June.
    5. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    6. Maghsoud Amiri & Mohammad Hashemi-Tabatabaei & Mohammad Ghahremanloo & Mehdi Keshavarz-Ghorabaee & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2021. "Evaluating Life Cycle of Buildings Using an Integrated Approach Based on Quantitative-Qualitative and Simplified Best-Worst Methods (QQM-SBWM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-28, April.
    7. Sadia Samar Ali & Rajbir Kaur & Shahbaz Khan, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability initiatives in warehouse for measuring sustainability performance: an emerging economy perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 324(1), pages 461-500, May.
    8. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Qin, Jindong & Zhou, Ligang & Mardani, Abbas & Deveci, Muhammet, 2022. "An integrated multi-criteria decision-making and multi-objective optimization model for socially responsible portfolio selection," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Mostafayi Darmian, Sobhan & Tavana, Madjid & Ribeiro-Navarrete, Samuel, 2024. "An investment evaluation and incentive allocation model for public-private partnerships in renewable energy development projects," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    10. Mohammad Khalilzadeh & Laleh Katoueizadeh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2020. "Risk identification and prioritization in banking projects of payment service provider companies: an empirical study," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27, December.
    11. Narwane, Vaibhav S. & Yadav, Vinay Surendra & Raut, Rakesh D. & Narkhede, Balkrishna E. & Gardas, Bhaskar B., 2021. "Sustainable development challenges of the biofuel industry in India based on integrated MCDM approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 298-309.
    12. Dragan Pamučar & Ljubomir Gigović & Zoran Bajić & Miljojko Janošević, 2017. "Location Selection for Wind Farms Using GIS Multi-Criteria Hybrid Model: An Approach Based on Fuzzy and Rough Numbers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-23, July.
    13. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    14. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    15. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    16. Junli Zhang & Guoteng Wang & Zheng Xu & Zheren Zhang, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Method and Strengthening Measures for AC/DC Hybrid Power Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Hamzeh Soltanali & Mehdi Khojastehpour & Siamak Kheybari, 2023. "Evaluating the critical success factors for maintenance management in agro-industries using multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 949-968, June.
    18. Yossi Hadad & Baruch Keren & Dima Alberg, 2023. "An Expert System for Ranking and Matching Electric Vehicles to Customer Specifications and Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Ebrahim Sharifi & Saman Hassanzadeh Amin & Liping Fang, 2025. "Assessing sustainability of food supply chains by using a novel method integrating group multi-criteria decision-making and interval Type-2 fuzzy set," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 3665-3705, February.
    20. Alizadeh, Reza & Gharizadeh Beiragh, Ramin & Soltanisehat, Leili & Soltanzadeh, Elham & Lund, Peter D., 2020. "Performance evaluation of complex electricity generation systems: A dynamic network-based data envelopment analysis approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02865-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.